Why is it that Masters level swimmers who participate in USS sanctioned meets under a separate USS registration can't have their times automatically qualify for USMS rankings and USMS National records? What is the reason for this separation? The rules with USMS and USS seem parallel enough to allow USS swims to qualify under USMS ranking and records. Do we care if elite older swimmers in their 30's (say Gary Hall Jr.) effectively end up owning the USMS national record by default? Is USMS afraid of merging to closely with USS? Why wouldn't USMS want to recognize the true best performance by and old man/women in the pool regardless of whether their card said USS or USMS on it?
John Smith
Parents
Former Member
Sorry to bring this up again, but this seems to be the perfect test case for all the above discussion.
My read is Gary takes the 30-34 USMS national record for the LCM 50 free at 22.45 from Rob Peel (22.81). However, due to more strict rules, he does not take the FINA Masters World record from Rowdy Gaines (23.21 in 1990)?
Frank that Sabir deal seems rediculous to me, by the way. he broke both records at the USMS nationals, he should get the records birth cert or not. How can his brith cert matter? I think he was 29 at the time. Its not like he was really 24 swimming up age. If he was 30 and swimming down, even better.
Sorry to bring this up again, but this seems to be the perfect test case for all the above discussion.
My read is Gary takes the 30-34 USMS national record for the LCM 50 free at 22.45 from Rob Peel (22.81). However, due to more strict rules, he does not take the FINA Masters World record from Rowdy Gaines (23.21 in 1990)?
Frank that Sabir deal seems rediculous to me, by the way. he broke both records at the USMS nationals, he should get the records birth cert or not. How can his brith cert matter? I think he was 29 at the time. Its not like he was really 24 swimming up age. If he was 30 and swimming down, even better.
